I dunno about that. Of course it affects what we can do in the immediate future, but when it comes to the trenches I think you can draft viable pieces to the OL and DL the next few years and still be okay on the cap, and I think that's exactly what Dallas is looking to do. And when Carr's contract is up, choose not to re-up on Carr (which they won't) or Claiborne.

The problem with that is the Cowboys have to improve the OL this offseason. They can't risk doing nothing in FA and hoping they get the players they want in the draft. If they aren't lucky, they get nothing or they reach for players to fill the need.

Some of that Carr money would have been nice to have in last year and/or this year's FA.

Giants may also very well be in decline because of that 4 year drought. Last I checked they didn't make the playoffs either this year.

Better yet, take a look at the rosters for the turnaround teams of Seattle and SF. Up and down you find 3-5th rounders making significant contributions.

Right, but the Giants were also in decline the two years prior to winning their 2nd recent superbowl. They had missed the playoffs 2 years straight and the year before that in '08 they went one and done.

I'm not saying we shouldn't strive to draft better, I'm just saying it doesn't guarantee you anything and you can win without it.

Playmakers make a difference, and sometimes it doesn't matter if you've only got a handful in some areas and JAGs everywhere else, like the Giants in 2011.

It would be nice if we could get great value out of our later picks like the 9ers and Seahawks... honestly I think we're heading in that direction. But we've had a few unsuccessful drafts during the Wade Phillips years that have set us back.

The defensive front 7 was not considered a weakness last year. The secondary was.

The front seven absolutely was a weakness, but when the secondary screws up it's usually more obvious and a big play.

For a football fool like Jerry, CB became the team's biggest need when Newman melted down in New York. Jones just couldn't see how Jay Ratliff was undersized and worn down and how Spears was and always will be a JAG.

Lee and Carters' injuries are a direct result of the DL being weak. Lack of pressure from the ends is a direct result of zero pressure up the middle giving the QB room to step into throws.

Lack of presence on the defensive front creates a terrible ripple effect.

Average secondary players play a lot better with a great DL in front of them. The reverse is also true, but a lot less often.

To succeed in hte NFL today you need decent players everywhere, and at least one great player up front, in the linebacking corps, and in the secondary.

All things being equal, get help up front first, in the secondary second, and in the linebacking corps third.

Weak in the LB corps you bend but don't break. Weak in the secondary, it's spectacularly bad when you do break. Weak up front, you break every which way all the time.

The front seven absolutely was a weakness, but when the secondary screws up it's usually more obvious and a big play.

For a football fool like Jerry, CB became the team's biggest need when Newman melted down in New York. Jones just couldn't see how Jay Ratliff was undersized and worn down and how Spears was and always will be a JAG.

Lee and Carters' injuries are a direct result of the DL being weak. Lack of pressure from the ends is a direct result of zero pressure up the middle giving the QB room to step into throws.

Lack of presence on the defensive front creates a terrible ripple effect.

Average secondary players play a lot better with a great DL in front of them. The reverse is also true, but a lot less often.

To succeed in hte NFL today you need decent players everywhere, and at least one great player up front, in the linebacking corps, and in the secondary.

All things being equal, get help up front first, in the secondary second, and in the linebacking corps third.

Weak in the LB corps you bend but don't break. Weak in the secondary, it's spectacularly bad when you do break. Weak up front, you break every which way all the time.

Agree on all points, but last year, Oline and secondary, were considered the biggest needs.

The problem with that is the Cowboys have to improve the OL this offseason. They can't risk doing nothing in FA and hoping they get the players they want in the draft. If they aren't lucky, they get nothing or they reach for players to fill the need.

Some of that Carr money would have been nice to have in last year and/or this year's FA.

Extra cap space is always nice to have. If anything, going for Carl Nicks rather than Brandon Carr last year would have been the best move, in this scenario.

This years OL class is both either too expensive or not worth it at all. We can't afford to pay for Jake Long, or Vollmer, or even Clady. And the guards this year... well there are no Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs this year, but the market will still demand big, Brandon Carr like contracts.

Agree on all points, but last year, Oline and secondary, were considered the biggest needs.

They were strongly considering Brockers or even Poe in the days leading up to the draft. They did not think they had a shot at Claiborne.

I really like Claiborne, but given the resources already spent on Carr it turned out to have been a poor choice for Dallas. I know hte draft is about talent, but when you spend 1st and 2nd round picks it must be about more than talent alone. That player must be a key component. Claiborne is not a Revis who can allow the entire defense to shift away from a #1 WR. At least not yet.

Having two fine corners helped immensely vs. the New York Giants, but mainly because the Giants' OL itself had finally had it. You also have to factor that Hakeem Nicks was just not right and the Giants didn't have a reliable third WR to step up in Manningham's absence.

People are overestimating the value of second round picks. Yes I know Bruce Carter and Sean Lee and what not, but the reality is if you get two starters out of an entire draft you are about at the league average if not above average. If one of those two turns into a Sean Lee or DeMarcus Ware type cornerstone you probably had a very good draft relative to the rest of the league. To assume that a first and a second round pick are the equivalent of two starters or even likely to become two starters is out of line with what the typical hit percentages are.

Also not a fan of the "we have too many holes" argument. It implies the goal of the draft should be to "fill holes" which it absolutely should not be. If you draft talent you are going to have the resources to "fill holes" in free agency. For instance Claibourne allows us to let Jenkins walk. You can use some of that cap room to resign Spencer, perhaps sign a guard ect. Let's say hypothetically we re franchise Spencer. If you then draft a pass rusher and he pans you can let him walk. You draft a wide receiver then maybe you can cut Austin in the near future and open up room. The key is just to get guys who can play.

I'm not saying we shouldn't strive to draft better, I'm just saying it doesn't guarantee you anything and you can win without it.

My original point was I don't think you can consistently only get 1 great player and nothing else out of a draft and compete long term, so I don't think that if Mo becomes a pro bowler and everyone else on down is off the team or out of the league that you can look at it as a 'good' draft.

That's not to say in the FA world you can't win consistently not drafting great - the Patriots for example are not a particularly good drafting team and it doesn't slow them down much, but it doesn't mean you are getting what you should out of your drafts.

The front seven absolutely was a weakness, but when the secondary screws up it's usually more obvious and a big play.

For a football fool like Jerry, CB became the team's biggest need when Newman melted down in New York. Jones just couldn't see how Jay Ratliff was undersized and worn down and how Spears was and always will be a JAG.

Lee and Carters' injuries are a direct result of the DL being weak. Lack of pressure from the ends is a direct result of zero pressure up the middle giving the QB room to step into throws.

Lack of presence on the defensive front creates a terrible ripple effect.

Average secondary players play a lot better with a great DL in front of them. The reverse is also true, but a lot less often.

To succeed in hte NFL today you need decent players everywhere, and at least one great player up front, in the linebacking corps, and in the secondary.

All things being equal, get help up front first, in the secondary second, and in the linebacking corps third.

Weak in the LB corps you bend but don't break. Weak in the secondary, it's spectacularly bad when you do break. Weak up front, you break every which way all the time.

Turf toe from covering a pass and tackling a guy on the sideline have nothing to do with the quality of the defensive front.

But I agree that we need help up front on defense and something better than Free more than anything on the team.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.
YR

Don't forget Danny Coale! He will be big this year if he can man up and stay healthy.

Trev Alberts got hurt and even then, he was a better pick than Dilfer.

Rookies very rarely do more than hold than own if they start in their first year. The list of first year players that were above average full time starters is a very small one, while Kiper for decades has said teams needed to plug in a certain pick (often after the first round) to a starting position when in reality they need time to develop. Spencer and Dez are good examples, even in the first round, as is last year's favorite DeCastro.

Top ten picks have the talent to be average starters in their first year and then get better as they acclimate to the league - with Tyron Smith and Claiborne as examples. Most average and above average starters in the NFL did very little as rookies and begin to contribute later on. Bradie James is a good example, he did nothing in his first two seasons as a 4th round pick but turned in a solid starter for five plus years after that.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.

Trev Alberts got hurt and even then, he was a better pick than Dilfer.

Rookies very rarely do more than hold than own if they start in their first year. The list of first year players that were above average full time starters is a very small one, while Kiper for decades has said teams needed to plug in a certain pick (often after the first round) to a starting position when in reality they need time to develop. Spencer and Dez are good examples, even in the first round, as is last year's favorite DeCastro.

Top ten picks have the talent to be average starters in their first year and then get better as they acclimate to the league - with Tyron Smith and Claiborne as examples. Most average and above average starters in the NFL did very little as rookies and begin to contribute later on. Bradie James is a good example, he did nothing in his first two seasons as a 4th round pick but turned in a solid starter for five plus years after that.

Alberts was the wrong pick. I don't know how anyone can say otherwise.

You're way out in left field on these rookies. I didn't realize Doug Martin wasn't a good starter this year. Neither was Russell Wilson. Alfred Morris. Bobby Wagner, Lavonte David, Michael Brockers, Fletcher Cox, Janoris Jenkins. All guys who might one day be good starters.

Honestly. There isn't an ounce of truth to what you're saying. You're taking a certain situation for a player and claiming it's the norm with everyone.

Extra cap space is always nice to have. If anything, going for Carl Nicks rather than Brandon Carr last year would have been the best move, in this scenario.

This years OL class is both either too expensive or not worth it at all. We can't afford to pay for Jake Long, or Vollmer, or even Clady. And the guards this year... well there are no Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs this year, but the market will still demand big, Brandon Carr like contracts.

I don't know how you can watch Doug Free play all year and think we should pay $9.5mm for one guard.

One great offensive lineman does not change much. The defense will still attack your scrubs. The Giants have been successful with 5 okay guys. Free was just awful and early Mackenzie was worse. We need to fill the big holes. We don't need the 49ers oline to run our offense.